October 22, 2013Dear Representative,We understand that H.R. 3080, the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2013, will be on the Housefloor as early as Wednesday October 23. This bill authorizes water projects, studies, and policies for the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers. H.R. 3080 fails to deliver on the reform moniker and we oppose its passage. Here are severalconcerns:

Backlog

- The Corps has a $60-80 billion project backlog and receives less than $2 billion in construction fundingannually. Even before the predictable increase in authorizations as this bill goes through the process, this legislationwould only shave a few billion dollars off the backlog. In addition, the legislation explicitly protects the roughly $28 billion worth of projects that were authorized in WRDA 2007, even those that have yet to see a dime of constructionfunding 6 years after passage.

Authorization

- We appreciate that the legislation sets up an authorization system that would not require earmarks.However, there are no sidebars on the system. Local interestswould suggest projects to Corps districts that wouldhave to study them and submit recommended projects to Congress. Without a prioritization system and criteria andwith little restriction on what should or should not be submitted, the system could overwhelm Corps districts. Inaddition, any project that fits in the Corps mission and is estimated to return even just one penny on the dollar would be submitted to Congress. Lawmakers are not good at saying no to constituent projects. It would be far better to build in certain criteria, including significant return on investment, to the authorization system.

Forced Increased Spending

–

The Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund has received far more revenue than has beenspent in recent years. The appropriate response to that is to reform the major cross-subsidies or reduce the tax rate or both. Instead, H.R. 3080 mandates greater payouts from the trust fund, which will inevitably cannibalize fundingfrom other Corps mission areas. In addition, the bill allows federal spending on traditionally non-federal projectslike

confined sediment disposal facilities and berth (“driveway”) dredging. The bill also creates an “emergingharbor” category, directing as much as 10 percent of the funding to ports with less than 1,000,000 tons of traffic.

According to the most recent port data, that would be a set-aside for ports ranked 136